Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds that results include quantity_sold and that the call maps to GET /organizations/{organization_id}/discounts/. It omits auth requirements, rate limits, and pagination walkthrough, so it is good but not exhaustive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource, with the scope rules following. The 'with quantity_sold' fragment is slightly awkward but costs little.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 8-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, the description covers purpose, scoping modes, and one notable return field. Since no output schema exists, quantity_sold is a useful hint, though return shape and pagination behavior remain only partly explained.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and every parameter is documented there, so baseline is 3. The description's scope explanation largely restates the scope enum description ('event requires event_id') rather than adding new syntax or format detail.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Search/list) and resource (organization's discounts and access codes) plus a distinctive output detail (quantity_sold). The verb distinguishes it cleanly from create_discount and update_discount among siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explains what each scope value means (event needs event_id, multi_events = cross-event, user = all org discounts), which effectively tells the agent which invocation mode to pick. It does not name alternative sibling tools or state exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.